The Horse Sense Blog compares the nonsense in today's news with good ol' fashioned horse sense

“…I shall speak forth my sentiments freely and without reserve.… It is only in this way that we can hope to arrive at truth, and fulfill the great responsibility which we hold to God and our country. Should I keep back my opinions at such a time, through fear of giving offense, I should consider myself as guilty of treason towards my country, and of an act of disloyalty toward the Majesty of Heaven, which I revere above all earthly kings.” - Patrick Henry, March 23, 1775

"The further a society drifts from truth the more it will hate those who speak it." - George Orwell

(c) copyright 2011-2016 Doug Johnson All Rights Reserved. All site content is copyright protected and subject to penalties for infringement of copyright laws.

Wednesday, October 29, 2014

GOP Uses Priebus Head Fake To Deceive Voters

Here's the Nonsense:  If the GOP is voted into control of the Senate in next week's midterms it will assure Americans that there will be no amnesty for illegals.

Here's the Horse Sense:  Don't ever take what the establishment GOP says at face value.  Their words are always to be carefully analyzed or they will deceive you just like the Democrats.

The good ol' establishment GOP is trying to deceive their base again.  Breitbart is reporting that RNC chairman Reince Priebus, when speaking of President Obama's plan to issue an Executive Order for amnesty to millions of illegal immigrants said, “We will do everything we can to make sure it doesn’t happen: Defunding, going to court, injunction. You name it. It’s wrong. It's illegal. And for so many reasons, and just the basic fabric of this country, we can’t allow it to happen and we won’t let it happen. I don’t know how to be any stronger than that. I’m telling you, everything we can do to stop it we will.” 

Don't think for a minute that this means the GOP plans to stand against amnesty, that's NOT what Priebus said.

This is typical of those involved in the politics of Washington.  They tell you something and say it in such a way that they can claim it's true, but you have to look below the surface to understand what they really mean.  The GOP is controlled by establishment Republicans of the Karl Rove type.  And they fully support amnesty for illegals.  All Priebus is saying is that they don't support the President doing it on his own through Executive Order.  

Priebus is correct when he says it is illegal for the president to do that, but the establishment GOP wants to stop the president from issuing an Executive Order, not stop amnesty.  They simply want it to go through the legal channels that lets Congress decide.

But Priebus said what he did hoping this will rally the base behind the GOP to get out to vote next week, not to say they stand against amnesty altogether. 

A good example was pointed out by Laura Ingraham, also reported by Breitbart, when she pointed out that the GOP pulled support of Scott Brown when he's against amnesty.  Let's face it folks, Brown is about as far left as they get in the GOP and yet even that wasn't good enough for the establishment.  His position against amnesty speaks right to the heart of what voters want, but against what the establishment controlling the GOP want.

Yes, I do support the Republicans running in next week's midterm elections.  Registered voters need to vote for every one of them.  Don't get me wrong, we need the Republican Party if there's any hope to save this country, but not as it's run today.  While I believe we must vote every Republican running in next week's election into office to replace or stand firm against the Democrats, we cannot lose sight of who most of them really are.  If they win big we will still have to hold them accountable or they will take America down a path that will result in the same place the Democrats have our nation headed... it will just take a little longer to get there.

The difference between the Republicans and Democrats in Congress is that the Democrats couldn't care less what the people of America want while the Republicans can still be pushed to do the right thing.  The Republicans are scared to death of the voters when they rise up en masse.  If voters keep pressure on them, consistently reminding them on each issue that they must do the people's will or they will be thrown out of office, they will do what they are told.  That is critical for voters to remember as they are, hopefully, swept into control of the Senate next week. 

Americans cannot rest, even if Republicans take over the Senate.  Pressure must continue to be brought on politicians while working hard to replace those in the establishment over time with solid conservatives. 

Don't take their words at face value, because they will never clearly tell you what they mean.  Their efforts are always to make you think they stand with you, but in reality they often do not.

Sunday, October 26, 2014

Vote Fraud And Corruption Are Alive And Well In America

Here's the Nonsense:  The American voting system is a system of integrity that should give voters confidence that their vote counts.

Here's the Horse Sense:  There are many problems with our voting process in America.  It is up to each voter to make sure that their vote is counted correctly.  The integrity of the system needs the citizens to be watchdogs to stop fraud and corruption.

For a long time, especially since Mitt Romney's loss for the presidency in 2012, many have thought that all we need to do is get enough people out to vote.  We know that 3 million voters stayed home in 2012 that could have turned the election to Romney's favor.  And we also know that there are 20-30 million eligible voters in America who claim to be evangelical Christians that are not even registered to vote.  Most of them would vote conservative.  Even I have said that if we can just get them to register and vote it would stem the tide of Democrat efforts.  However, no matter how many people we get to vote, the fact is that it is no guarantee that it can overcome vote fraud and corruption.  Once again, we're already seeing evidence of it in the current midterm elections. recently reported that when Jim Moynihan, Republican candidate for Illinois state representative, went to vote at the Schaumburg, IL public library polling place, he was surprised to find it hard to vote for himself.'s report said:

"I tried to cast a vote for myself and instead it cast the vote for my opponent," Moynihan said.  "You could imagine my surprise as the same thing happened with a number of other races when I tried to vote for a Republican and the machine registered a vote for a Democrat."

The officials are claiming that the machine wasn't calibrated properly and have taken the machine out of service.  My first question is why weren't all machines taken out of service?  If one has this problem who is to say that the others don't have the same problem?  Why weren't the machines tested prior to voting to make sure they were working?  And, since many people don't check to make sure their votes are being calculated properly and may have ended up giving votes to someone they did not want to vote for, what assurances do voters who voted before Moynihan have that their votes were counted correctly? 

I heard that someone else had a similar problem with their ballot in Illinois.  They said their machine kept changing Republican votes to Democrat, but that eventually they got it to work correctly.  The person said that they didn't think much of it until they heard this story.  

THEY DIDN'T THINK MUCH OF IT?!!!  How could you not think much of it?  Why wouldn't someone be screaming for an election judge or precinct worker and demanding that not only is their vote fixed but that an investigation be launched by officials immediately?  This is about one of the most important rights that Americans have, the right to vote.  

Fraudulent voting is also huge a problem.  Breitbart is reporting that a study has been released showing that voting by non-citizens could change the outcome of the upcoming Senate election.  The story says:    

"'Could control of the Senate in 2014 be decided by illegal votes cast by non-citizens?'  That is the question posed by political scientists Jesse Richman and David Earnest, who answer in a forthcoming article in the journal Electoral Studies:  'Most non-citizens do not register, let alone vote.  But enough do that their participation can change the outcome of close races.'  And, the researchers note, 80% of non-citizen votes go to Democrats."

Add to this moves by Democrats to change voting laws and you have a potential for entirely different outcomes in elections.  For example, in Colorado, as reported by the Pueblo Chieftain newspaper, new laws do nothing but open the doors to more fraud.  The report stated:   

"Under the law passed this year, people need only to swear under penalty of perjury that they have lived in Colorado for at least 22 days and reside or plan to reside in the precinct or county where they wish to vote. Once they have done that, they are allowed to cast ballots. 

"The problem is, if there were groups from outside a jurisdiction who want to affect an election in that jurisdiction, they could vote under the conditions outlined in the new law, but then later say they had a change of heart and have abandoned plans to move into that jurisdiction."

Did you notice that it says the law allows people to say they "plan" to reside in the precinct or county.  They don't have to live there, they can just say they "plan" to live there.  And, by the way, when they say they plan to live there they are given a ballot on the spot to vote.  There is no waiting.  It's a disaster in the making.

John Fund at National Review has reported that well-known undercover filmmaker James O'Keefe recently looked to find out if there's fraud in Colorado elections.  O'Keefe found that Colorado mails ballots to everyone who's registered, whether you asked for one or not.  He raises the question as to whether someone could simply go through trash and pick up discarded ballots, fill them out, and send them in.  Not only is the possibility of that happening confirmed by Colorado Secretary of State Scott Gessler, O'Keefe found Democrat officials encouraging him to do it.  

Colorado was effectively turned to a blue state not too many years back by efforts well outlined in Michelle Malkin's new film Rocky Mountain Heist.  She shows not only how Colorado was taken over, but how the Democrats are using the same methods to turn other states like Texas and Virginia into blue states.  Among those efforts was the voting law I just described.  (By the way, if you haven't seen Rocky Mountain Heist, go out of your way to do so. It's an excellent film that should make every American take notice of what's happening in their local politics.)

The list of potential election problems goes on and on.  And it sure looks questionable as the vast majority of times we hear of these problems it seems to be  Democrats involved in, at best, questionable circumstances to affect election results.  We've seen it with votes of dead people, people who've moved away from that area, and even by voting machines changing a Republican vote to a Democrat vote.  

With the current type of machines being used in most polling places, there is huge room for problems. Whether we like it or not, the only verifiable and sure way to assure integrity is to go back to the traditional paper ballot.  Then there are physical ballots that can be counted and checked if there is a question or problem.  Our current system is ripe for abuse and fraud.

People have said for years that even with voter fraud if enough people turn out to vote, any fraud will not override election results.  But this raises some questions:
1.)  Why should we settle for this?  After all, this is a matter of abiding by the law and we shouldn't ignore violations of law.  Catching and punishing criminals is, among other things, a deterrent to others from committing the same crimes.  Of course with a Justice Dept. like we have, and the fact that they've already shown they won't prosecute certain clear-cut cases of voter intimidation, it will be an uphill battle for Americans to see justice from the work of our current Justice Dept. (Former DOJ attorney J. Christian Adams, in his book Injustice, about the New Black Panthers case in 2008, outlines the state of injustice coming from our Justice Dept.)

2.)  Americans should be able to vote with confidence knowing that their vote counts and is not corrupted, diluted, diverted, or countered by something illegal happening in the process.  Whether it's preventing a fraudulent vote countering a legitimate vote or a process that guarantees that a vote being changed to another candidate can't happen, Americans should know that our voting process has integrity.  Without that integrity, we never really know if an election is legitimate.  After the 2012 election how many times did we hear about fraud affecting the election?  There were even stories that some areas of the country had more votes for Obama than they had registered voters.  WND compiled a list of vote fraud reports which you can read here.  

American elections must have integrity or there is no hope for our republic.  We are no better than any totalitarian regime that claims to have elections but in reality they are nothing more than a phony production trying to prove to the world that their people have freedom when, in reality, their freedom is only an illusion.

Your vote is critical in the midterm elections in November.  And when you do vote, make sure to check that the machine is tabulating your votes correctly.  

UPDATE:  After I wrote and posted this today I received an email from a reader that directly applies to the voting machine "calibration errors."  It said, "Having programmed touch screen based systems since 1984, I find they don't need 'calibration.'  The user interface for the computers in Illinois were improperly and likely intentionally constructed to convert most or all votes to votes for the Democrats. The voting system has been so corrupted that it is praising it too highly to call it merely broken." 

That update says it all.  We have a problem in this country and it's up to us to take our country back.

Sunday, October 19, 2014

President's Plan To Use Haitians To Get More Immigrants From Central America

Here's the Nonsense:  The president is only trying to help people by bringing families back together.  That's a good thing.

Here's the Horse Sense:  This has nothing to do with reuniting families and everything to do with the continuing efforts of this administration to overload our system.  And it's just an example of more to come.

While the public is busy worrying about ebola, ISIS, open borders, the IRS scandal, the Benghazi scandal, the Fast and Furious scandal, and on and on, our illustrious president is adding more for us to be concerned about.  In fact, it's probably a trial run for what he plans to do to radically increase the number of immigrants through our porous southern border.  

The DHS has announced that in 2015 it's implementing a program to allow thousands of Haitians into the country without visas.  (Note: By waiting until 2015 it puts the 2014 midterm elections behind us so this cannot impact those elections.)  They are calling it Haitian family reunification, and I suspect that using the guise of bringing families back together is a trial run at what they will do with all the people coming across the southern border in the future.

The plan is to offer the Haitians the opportunity to come to America without visas so they can "reunite" with their family members.  On the outside it looks like a noble effort to support families, but in reality it's one more way the president can flood our system to overload it.

The Washington Times has reported on this issue stating that Senator Chuck Grassley, whose Senate Judiciary Committee has jurisdiction over immigration policy, has said the administration's action is "an irresponsible overreach of the executive branch's authority."  He went on to ask, "Which countries are next on President Obama's list?"   The article goes on to say that the State Department's National Visa Center will begin notifying families who may be eligible to take part in the program.  So, not only will they open the doors, they'll be recruiting foreigners to take part in it.

There are about 100,000 Haitians currently waiting for visas, but this will fast track the entry of at least that many people into the country.  The administration wants us to think it's the right thing to do because it will help reunite families and rebuild Haiti that suffered huge losses from hurricane damage.  

I'm not sure how this rebuilds Haiti, but it does bring more people here using the excuse of reuniting families.  Of course it will also add more burden to our healthcare system and welfare system as our government encourages the new immigrants to take advantage of those benefits.  This will serve as another step in the Cloward and Piven strategy to overload our system and ultimately collapse it.  (If you aren't familiar with the Cloward and Piven strategy and Obama's use of manufactured crisis, I highly recommend reading this American Thinker article that I referred to in my last post as well.)

Think about it.  Using the idea that it is the moral thing to do to bring families back together, Obama will get support from every bleeding heart in the media and the public.  And by bringing in immigrants this way he will set the stage to use the same strategy again.  Once he's done it with the Haitians, it will only be a matter of time before he will probably offer a similar deal to the illegal immigrants we have coming in from Central America across our southern border.

The president hasn't given up on amnesty for illegals, as can be seen in a new report by Breitbart news.  He continues to work around and behind the law to get what he wants.

Americans are not involved in their government.  They do not hold it accountable, which was a specific responsibility that our founders designed to keep the government under the control of the citizens.  Besides their narcissism that keeps most Americans from paying attention to what's going on in Washington, having so many crises constantly going on makes it virtually impossible for those who do want to be informed to understand all that is happening.  

We're being inundated with crisis after catastrophe after dilemma after emergency after disaster after...well, hopefully you should get the point.  The war against America is hitting us on every front.  That alone should be enough for people to get involved, but instead I fear that it's causing people to put their heads in the sand and ignore what's happening.  America is going from being known as a land of the fierce and courageous eagle to the land of the ostrich with its head in the sand.

Wednesday, October 15, 2014

America's Most Important Story - Are You Missing It?

Here's the Nonsense:  Houston is just trying to make their city a better place to live.  It's not an issue that's important to the rest of the country

Here's the Horse Sense:  Houston is the place where all Americans should be focused.  First Amendment rights are under attack and if they are lost there, they will be lost across the nation.

Fox News is reporting the most important story in America, but even they don't seem to realize it's importance.  We're all consumed right now with the mass of stories threatening our security, safety, and way of life.  Whether it's about ISIS, ebola, open borders, presidential scandals, or whatever, nothing trumps this story.  What is it?  It's the story about the City of Houston demanding copies of pastors sermons.  Doesn't sound like much, right?  But it is.  And it's the most important because this is an assault on First Amendment rights, which is the cornerstone of all freedoms in America.

Whether you are a Christian, an atheist, or your faith is in another religion, this story is of critical importance to YOU.  When we understand the founding of America and what our nation is all about, we understand that the right to believe as you choose is the most fundamental freedom there is.  If you are not allowed to believe as you choose, you have no freedom.

The mayor of Houston is a lesbian who put through a law some time back that protects sexual predators.  That's right, PROTECTS SEXUAL PREDATORS!  The law allows people of either gender to use the restrooms, locker rooms, and other gender specific facilities of the sex that they feel they are most aligned with.  So, if a man gets up in the morning and decides he feels like a woman that day, I guess he can go down to the local YMCA and use the women's locker room.  And, a question that has yet to be answered, if a woman finds him doing something creepy or dangerous and assaults him in defense of herself or another woman or girl, the law appears to make her the criminal in danger of prosecution.  Tell that to your concealed carry licensed wife who pulls her gun out of her purse and shoots the monster when he's about to grab a 10 year old girl in the showers!

But that wasn't enough.  Now Houston is demanding that pastors turn over sermons and speeches relating to the mayor, homosexuality and gender identity.  For what purpose is anybody's guess.  But my guess is that the Fox report is right when it says that they may be used to bully those pastors to silence them and turn the community against them. 

The people who came to this continent from Europe in the early 17th century started a wave of immigration of people seeking religious freedom.  They were persecuted in their home countries and fled to find a place where they could worship freely and in peace.  When the country was founded at the end of the 18th century, our founders made religious freedom and freedom of thought and speech the cornerstone of our republic.  They did this because they knew that without the right to believe and speak what you choose, you have no freedoms.

Now, over 2 centuries later those freedoms are under siege.  We've seen an increase in the persecution of Christians in minor forms in America in recent decades.  Sure, those who are opposed to Christianity have denied it, but the facts are obvious.  From small things like not allowing the mention of Christmas in schools and government offices to larger things like now, the 4th largest city in America demanding copies of sermons that obviously teach what the Bible says, we've seen the pressure increase.  We have an administration in Washington that won't stand up for Christians or Jews, but will support virtually anything Muslims do.  These same kinds of actions occur on various levels in municipalities across our country.

Americans are losing their freedoms and this is a clear example of the bullying tactics government can try to use to achieve those goals.  It's time to stand up and stop the madness.  Everyone, whether you agree with them or not, has the right to believe as they choose.  Unfortunately our schools are teaching our children that that is not the case.  They are teaching that only politically correct thought should be allowed.

Recent surveys showed that less than half of Republicans and Democrats believed you should have the right to think and speak as you choose.  53% of Independents believed you should have that right (a right that is guaranteed by the First Amendment).  While it was good to see that at least the majority (by a small margin) of Independents get it, what's scary is that even the group with the most people believing in those freedoms only had just over half of the people agreeing with these rights.  So, about half of our country no longer believes that you have the right to believe and speak as you choose.

Years ago the Nazis fought in court for the right to march in Skokie, IL, a predominantly Jewish suburb of Chicago.  Few people remember the case and of those who do, most remember it incorrectly.  The Nazis won their court battle, although they never actually marched.  But their right was critically important because if they didn't have the right to believe and speak those beliefs freely (even though those beliefs are disgusting), then everyone was in danger of losing that right.

When the Holocaust occurred in Nazi Germany, not enough people stood up and fought.  By the time each group realized the Nazis were coming for them, it was too late because they didn't stand up for the rights of others.  Lutheran pastor Martin Niemoller said it best when he said:

  "In Germany they came first for the Communists, and I didn't speak up because I wasn't a Communist. Then they came for the Jews, and I didn't speak up because I wasn't a Jew. Then they came for the trade unionists, and I didn't speak up because I wasn't a trade unionist. Then they came for the Catholics, and I didn't speak up because I was a Protestant. Then they came for me, and by that time no one was left to speak up."

Are you willing to stand for freedom, or just let it dwindle away?  The churches in Houston need every American's support.

Saturday, October 11, 2014

Is Obama Using Ebola Threat To Accomplish His Plan For America's Future?

Here's the Nonsense:  The way President Obama is handling the ebola threat just shows his misunderstanding of the risk and ignorance in how to handle something like this.

Here's the Horse Sense:  President Obama has been extremely efficient and competent at accomplishing his goals for America. Every situation is used to achieve those goals.  Why would this be the one issue where he isn't using a situation to further his plans?

There's something wrong when our government won't protect the American people.  It seems that no one can understand the actions of this administration when it comes to the ebola threat.  Anyone who has read my writings knows that I recognize the nature of the progressive ideology of this president and the Democrats who control our government.  They want to change our system of free market capitalism to a Marxist socialist (pronounced "communist") system.  However, even with that intention, I wasn't putting together what the purpose could be of allowing such risk to Americans by opening our nation up to the ebola threat. Then it hit me, there are advantages both short term and long term for them to allow this to happen.  

Saul Alinsky outlined methods to be used to accomplish these goals in his book Rules for Radicals (if you don't have a copy, you owe it to yourself to get one as it will clearly show you the tactics the left uses).  He dedicates his book to Lucifer (Lucifer is Satan for those who are not familiar with the Biblical character) saying, "Lest we forget at least an over-the-shoulder acknowledgment to the very first radical:  from all our legends, mythology, and history... the first radical known to man who rebelled against the establishment and did it so effectively that he at least won his own kingdom - Lucifer."   

That dedication shows where Alinsky's heart was and that his admiration for Satan was, as is typical of leftists, based on a confused and limited understanding.  While he hails Satan as the first radical who "won his own kingdom" he misses the point that ultimately Satan lost because his kingdom is temporary.  While it does last thousands of years, for the rest of eternity he will be in hell, which I promise you is not a place where he will be in power, but rather will suffer for what he's done.  Somehow comparing a few thousand years to forever doesn't seem like much of a win.  (In fact, as John Newton, the man who wrote the lyrics to Amazing Grace, so profoundly pointed out, in eternity after 10,000 years you still have no fewer days left than you did when the 10,000 years started.)  

Alinsky was misguided, as we have already seen, but it's important to note something else at this point.  On page 10 of his book he writes that "a Marxist begins with his prime truth that all evils are caused by the exploitation of the proletariat by the capitalists.  From this he logically proceeds to the revolution to end capitalism, then into the third stage of reorganization into a new social order of the dictatorship of the proletariat, and finally the last stage - the political paradise of communism."  This is where Alinsky's followers such as Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton believe we should be (for a brief, but very good explanation of Obama's and Clinton's ties to Alinksy take the time to click here and read the article).

So, by now you're wondering what all this has to do with the ebola threat.  The ebola threat is causing a huge amount of fear and, in some people, even panic, which will get worse if the threat gets greater.  On page 110 of his book, Alinsky writes of community organizing (the process in which Obama was trained by Alinsky's organization and that is used to achieve their purposes), "The first step in community organization is community disorganization.  The disruption of the present organization is the first step toward community organization.  Present arrangements must be disorganized if they are to be displaced by new patterns.... All change means disorganization of the old and organization of the new."  He goes on to write, "An organizer must stir up dissatisfaction and discontent..."

What could stir up more dissatisfaction and discontent with what's happening in our country than fear?  When fear takes over, nothing else matters.  On pages 127-134 Alinsky writes about power tactics saying "Whenever possible, go outside the expertise of the enemy.  Look for ways to increase insecurity, anxiety and uncertainly."  There isn't much that could cause more insecurity, anxiety and uncertainty than the threat of ebola wiping out large portions of our population.

If ebola were to infect people south of our border, it would cause a mass panic that would send thousands more illegal immigrants racing to cross our border.  UPDATE:  CNS News reports that there is concern within our military of this happening.  

America is seen by the rest of the world as the place of safety.  People in Latin America would race to America to try to be safe from the ebola virus or get treatment for it.  Whether they had ebola or not, they would bring with them (as we're already seeing from the current surge of illegals) other diseases and health problems.  This, along with the demands on our welfare system, would overburden our healthcare system and welfare system.  It would also bring millions more new Democrat voters into the country.  

The overloaded system (just as the Cloward and Piven strategy teaches) would collapse and set up the perfect opportunity for the progressives to throw out our system and replace it with their Marxist system.  

Remember, no issue is ever about the actual issue for progressives.  Even Obama has admitted that it is always about more power and control.  This would give the left not only more power and control, but ABSOLUTE power and control.  There would not be a way of fighting back once they've succeeded.  

If you doubt Obama's methods, I highly recommend clicking here to read an excellent article from 2008 written by James Simpson for American Thinker.  It is well worth your time to understand how Obama's uses a strategy of manufactured crisis.  Clearly Mr. Simpson saw what was happening way back then, but sadly most Americans didn't.  

But is the handling of the ebola threat just about getting more illegals into the country to increase the Democrat voter rolls?  Is it possibly also about something much longer term and even more ominous?  

As I think about this I also recognize that this could fit well into the U.N.'s Agenda 21 that George H. W. Bush signed and has been complied with by Bill Clinton, George W. Bush, and even moved further forward by Barack Obama.  For an excellent overview of what it is all about check out my friend Tom DeWeese's American Policy Center website.

The United Nations' Agenda 21 plans to impose:

  • Ending national sovereignty
  • State planning and management of all land resources, ecosystems, forest, deserts, mountains, oceans and fresh water sources, agriculture, and rural development
  • Abolishing private property ownership
  • Government to determine the role of business and financial resources
  • Restructure of the family unit with children being raised by the government
  • Restrictions on freedom of movement by citizens
  • Government determining each citizen's occupation 
  • Creation of areas where humans are allowed to live and forcing citizens to resettle in those areas and vacate private property
  • Reduction of global population to achieve the above goals

If diseases like ebola are not controlled, ultimately we would see reductions in population, which would help achieve the goals of Agenda 21.  Since Obama has been a huge supporter of Agenda 21, which George H. W. Bush committed the United States to when he signed it during his presidency, could it be possible that allowing the ebola threat would help towards a reduced population?

Certainly I don't know the answer, but it seems eerily suspicious that the actions that are being taken (or not taken) when it comes to ebola and America are just due to incompetence.  Everything this president does is extremely competent at achieving his plans.  Why would this be any different?  

Monday, October 6, 2014

Obama Sends Envoy To Oklahoma Beheader's Mosque To Say Thank You

Here's the Nonsense:  The Obama administration works hard to bring Americans together and unify us as a nation.

Here's the Horse Sense:  This administration not only doesn't work to unify Americans, it makes choices that are questionable at best.  This appears to be one of their worst choices to date.

KFOR TV in Oklahoma City is reporting that the White House sent an envoy to the Oklahoma beheader's mosque on Saturday, Oct. 4th to read a special thank you note and praise from the president.  David Myers, a DHS director, flew to Oklahoma and read the message to the congregation.  What should this tell us about our nation's leadership?

While the thank you message from the president was said to be for their work after the terrible destruction in Moore, a suburb of Oklahoma City, in the 2013 tornado disaster that hit that community, the question is why this message was sent at this time.  Certainly the White House will defend the message on the basis that it had to do with the tornado, not the beheading.  But the timing is questionable. 

A more realistic assessment of the administration's action would ask why, no matter what they did after the tornado, would the government send any positive communication to a mosque that has ties to radical Islam? 

Alton Nolen, the man who beheaded his co-worker recently and was a member of the mosque, was reported by such media sources as the Washington Post and CNN to have tried to convert co-workers to Islam, had a Facebook page with pictures of Osama bin Laden and of jihadists holding weapons, and that he'd been watching videos of beheadings.  The Daily Mail UK reported that he was shouting Islamic phrases while doing the killing, and Pam Geller reported that he requested a Muslim attorney.  But the FBI concluded that it had nothing to do with terrorism, it was just workplace violence.  

The FBI says that they can't be sure that the beheading videos Nolen was watching were made by ISIS, so I guess that means those videos really aren't a big deal.  According to that logic, any other source of terrorism isn't a threat.

And if all that wasn't enough, the mosque itself has its own questionable background.  According to Jihad Watch, an imam who recently preached there endorses the Islamic belief that everyone must either convert, pay jizyah (a tax non-believers must pay and then live under Islamic rule), or jihad (which, as I understand it, means they'll be put to death).  Plus, a former imam from the mosque has, according to Breitbart, ties to al Qaeda and now preaches at the mosque in Boston that the Boston Marathon bombers, the Tsarnaev brothers, attended.

So, instead of investigating the mosque, instead of standing against terror and calling what it is, this administration not only calls this beheading workplace violence, they send a thank you note to the mosque.  KFOR concludes their report by saying:  "Now, with all the recent praise, Oklahoma Muslims have been reassured that they are a part of the American society."   

With these kinds of things happening in our own government, shouldn't we be spending all of our time and effort to replace those who represent us in elected office with Americans who care about the security and future of America?